HR Challenge 2008: Elections and the Workplace
Today the political climate is somewhat scary to say the least. The complex issues to be decided in the current US election can be unsettling to our workforce as they wonder about the outcomes and directions for the economy and the country. In a general sense it may not seem that there is much we as HR professionals can do to regarding these turns of events. But we do have the chance to make a difference and a leader in our own right to the groups people we work with on a daily basis.
A question to ask ourselves is “do we have an obligation to keep our employees informed and educated on these matters?” or will the attempt to do so look like an attempt to sway employees to vote whichever way will positively impact the business? Take Wal-Mart for example; during the last few months they have been exposing their leadership team to the potential of what may happen regarding unionization if a Democrat is voted into office (Dorfman, 2008; Slater 2008). When coming under scrutiny, Wal-Mart states that this is an attempt strictly to educate their employees on important political matters not to make employees feel pressured to vote a certain way, but not everyone agrees. Many feel it is a play by big business to sway the vote in the direction which will best serve the business, not the average citizen.
In other workplaces, workers have strong feelings about candidates—and want to convince co-workers to join them in taking particular positions. Many hot issues about gender, race, health care and other topics that can relate to HR policies are in discussion in the current election cycle. The Civil Rights Act protects workers from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin, but no federal law prevents employers from discriminating against non-unionized employees based on political opinions or activities.
Company policies should be clearly presented, and complaints about perceived harassment should be investigated and addressed in a timely manner.
Managers also have a responsibility to set the tone. “If you’re a manager, you must be careful about expressing your political views. Don’t offer your opinion unless asked, and always let workers know you don’t expect them to agree with you. If you’re an employee, make sure you don’t use an aggressive, sarcastic or patronizing tone when responding to another worker’s political views”(Bruzzese, 2008).
We have an obligation to help educate but at what point do we need to draw the line? What should our position be and how would that look? What are your thoughts and experiences?
Sources:
Bruzzese, A. (2008). Politics in workplace needn’t sway your vote. Retrieved September 30, 2008, from http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/ss/byauthor/93798
Dorfman, B. (2008, August 14, 2008). U.S. groups file election complaint against Wal-Mart. Reuters.
Slater, D. (2008, August 14). Did Wal-Mart violate federal election laws? Labor groups want to know. Wall Street Journal.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 1:41 pm and is filed under Current Topics, Featured Contributors. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:13 am
Greetings,
Keep politics out of the workplace! Having a casual conversation during break time with a colleague is fine but that does not require HR involvement in educating the employees about the different impact that a corporation might faced if a particular candidate gets in office. Let the employees do their own homework about the candidate they intend to vote for.
In some companies the HR dept. is there to prevent litigation and they are not there in the best interest of the employees. So why all of a sudden HR wants to make sure that the employees are well informed about the political candidates? How about giving the employees control over how much a CEO should make? after all, the employees have the right to know since this decision effects them directly.
October 6th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
The New York TImes’ Lisa Belkin wrote about this topic a couple of days ago…see: “Talking Politics in the Office” online at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/02/fashion/02work.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=lisa%20belkin&st=cse&oref=slogin.
Her closing point is a good one: ” it should be done, quietly and politely. So go off and play nicely. And remember to vote, or you don’t get to come into work on Nov. 5 and complain about who won.”
October 7th, 2008 at 6:27 am
This learner agree with Marj(October 2, 2008), Lets keep politics away from the workplace; educating employees about politics can hinder the workplace. Lets continue to educate our employees about ways to increase your knowledge and expanding their career within the organization.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:21 am
I think Marj’s point about CEO salaries is a good one. Anyone who is interested in voting and wants to vote already has an opinion about who they will or will not vote for. I don’t need my workplace interfering even more into my personal life and responsibilities.
But the CEO salaries, now that’s something I care about. Rich Clabaugh at the Institute for Policy Studies reports that the US has the most CEO’s who make proportionately more than their workers. The average CEO in the Unites States make 411 times more than their lowest paid worker. 411!
Other countries share more of the company’s profits with employees, and thus have lower ratios of CEO pay to employee pay: China 36 times more than the lowest paid worker, Britain 32, Canada 23, France 23, and Japan 11 times more. The stark compensation differences between American CEOs and CEOs in other countries reveal that extreme CEO greed is uniquely American.
Why is the ratio of CEO pay to employee pay in America 37 times more than it is in Japan–which also has many large, successful international companies?
The leadership in this country lines their pockets while their employees work more hours to try to get ahead. That’s a workplace issue that effects me.
October 13th, 2008 at 7:17 am
What about educational settings? See Stanley Fish’s article “Buttons and Bows” about campaign buttons in the classroom (http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/buttons-and-bows/).
If policies and acceptable practices are unclear in face to face settings, what about the online classroom? If you teach– or are an online learner– do you express your political views? Why or why nt? What happens when you do?
October 14th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Janet posed the question so I’ll answer. I’m a new student to Capella. I think political discussions could take place in the Cyber Cafe section. This is supposed to be for informal discussions.
The exciting thing about this Presidential Election is that people are passionate about it. We should have educated discussions with our USA wide student roster. What a better way to understand the importance of one candidate over another based on the region of this country you live in.
October 19th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I was promoted to management two years ago. I have been eating in the breakroom for years and still continue to do so. All of us respect one another and freely express our opinions on anything and everything and that includes the upcoming elections. What is important is that such discussions should not take place on company time. Lunch is your own personal time to do with it what you please. Politics brings its own set of challenges. If the groundwork has already been set to disagree without being disagreeable, it can be a healthy and enlightening discussion.
October 24th, 2008 at 5:21 am
I have enjoyed reading all the comments on this article and agree with the sentiment that lively discussion can be health and fun. There is not a reason to prohibit or try and control such discussion but then there also have to be a point at which if things get out of hand it can be put back under control.
Agreeing to disagree is healthy as Michele said.